About your Search

20121112
20121120
Search Results 0 to 14 of about 15 (some duplicates have been removed)
and top afghanistan commander john allen. the pentagon is now investigating general allen for allegedly sending thousands of inappropriate e-mails to kelley but allen is saying he did nothing wrong and the president and the army are standing by him. >> the president thinks very highly of general allen and his service to his country. as well as the job he has done in afghanistan. >> i believe john allen until somebody proves otherwise i believe that he did nothing inappropriate. >> that was white house spokesman jay carney and former army vice chief of staff peter tee ellie. jill kelley also received threatening letters from paula broadwell. now a 911 call is coming to light of kelley telling dispatchers saying she needed diplomatic protection. as the scandal widens, broadwell is holing herself up in the home of her brother near rock creek park. a jogger found broadwell's lost driver's license in the park and turned into the police. more bill is right after the break. stay with us. we have a big, big hour
that another major military figure, general john allen, the commander of u.s. and nato troops in afghanistan and petraeus' successor in that position, has been having an e-mail relationship with jill kelley. the fbi uncovers somewhere between 20,000 and 30,000 pages of documents that contain, quote, potentially inappropriate communication between allen and kelley, one senior u.s. defense official tells the "washington post." "the post" also reports that allen received at least one e-mail that talks about kelley from an unidentified account that was traced to none other than paula broadwell. well, there you have it. you're investigating this. i tried to explain this, and i'm trying not to be light-hearted, but there's such an aspect to this story rather well below the importance of the positions these men hold. one of them being, of course, our commander in afghanistan. the other one until recently head of the cia. this aspect to it, it's just -- well, i don't know what to say. i'm not used to covering these kinds of stories and wouldn't be if these weren't the people involved. your thoughts
is representative john heck and peter king. here is their interpretation of the closed door hearings. >> the initial talking points put together in unclassified format at the house intelligence committee initially did state that al qaeda affiliated groups were involved. however, by the time we understand that went through its editing process after it left langley that reference was taken out. >> the fact is the best estimate of the intelligence community on september 15th and 16th was that there was direct al qaeda involvement. that was taken out. to me, again, if i had to presume i would say it was somebody in the administration had to have taken it out. because there was nobody in the director of national intelligence office. nobody in the cia that did it. so, it was someone else that did it. >> someone in the administration. if you go to the front page of foxnews.com right now you will see the big story on there that's racing raising the question in that piece. we will be speaking to peter king to try to figure out who the administration got the intelligence information their hands and said, okay
. another investigation of general john allen allegedly exchanged 20 to 30,000 e-mails with jill kelly, the married woman who reportedly kicked off the investigation of general petraeus. the general joseph dunford is in line to succeed him and leon pi net at a has askedp. >> joy: netta has asked them to now we now know they met back in harvard in 2006. she wrote a biography but their affair did not allegedly start until september of 2011 after he took over at the c.i.a. it ended four months ago but in may jill kelly, the woman who volunteers as a social planner for the military went to a friend at the fbi and complained she was getting harassing e-mails from paula broadwell. he had been sending shirtless photos to kelly and that's how they found out. it's so convoluted. we're back after the break. >>(narrator) bill press is on current tv. >>liberal and proud of it. >>(narrator) unafraid, outspoken, and above all politically direct. >>we'll do our best to carry the flag from 6 to 9 every morning. [ ♪ theme music ♪ ] [ ♪ music ♪ ] >> announcer: ladies and gentlemen, it's "the
role here because this is the land of the lane. house speaker john boehner has said it himself. this is the law of the land. this is the next big step. if perry and walker don't do t then the federal will do it for them. >> jennifer: this seems to me these republican governors are all about state rights would want to set up this exchange because it allows them to be these states and republican governors in charge and not the hated federal government. why are they fighting? >> they're putting ideology and partisan politics over the benefits of consumers. the great fallacy here is that obama-care is a government takeover of your healthcare. the government will come into your life and control your care. but these exchanges are private insurers they're giving you option. it is a marketplace and a private marketplace for to you pick out the best options amist amidst these horrible ones. it's really partisan talking points no more, no less. >> jennifer: earlier this year chris christie vetoed the bill but since that time the new jersey legislature passed a similar bill, and it's back
to me three weeks ago mitt romney would get fewer votes than john mccain and it looks like he'll be 2 million viewer, i would have been du dumbfounded. >> michael, thanks for joining us. we have had a good time arguing and discussing things occasionally agreeing on things but often not. let me ask you about that republican world view. i wonder what color the sky is. how did they see this election the way rasmussen pollsters would see it, basically a romney romp? how did they get it so wrong? >> i think there was a feeding into a mythology that somehow the country would categorically reject the president because we had, that the country would somehow say to itself, you know, we can't live with this new land of big government health care, big government spending, et cetera, because we can't. and that's fine. the problem was in articulating to the american people why we can't live with those things, why those things are bad, and instead, as you have noted many times on this program, we got w waylaid by conversations about women's bodies and abortion and things that didn't go to the nub o
Search Results 0 to 14 of about 15 (some duplicates have been removed)